Bill of Rights Privacy vs. legislated DNA collection SB 104 | P J Klosinski

By P J Klosinski

SB 104 is calculated to deny the rights of the accused. The prohibition against the government obtaining evidence against you without due process cannot be reconciled through this bill.

Indiana lawmakers are required to take an oath to support the Constitution of this State, and of the United States. Indiana declares the law governing Indiana to be the Constitution of the United States and of this state and all statutes of the general assembly of the state in force and not inconsistent with such constitutions. . .” Where is the authority in the Indiana Constitution which would provide an exemption to legislate away the terms of an individual right? A protecting provision ensuring consistency must be maintained is specified by the mandate that: “No law shall be passed the taking effect of which shall be made to depend upon any authority, except as provided in this Constitution”.

SB 104 requires: “every person arrested for a felony after June 30, 2017, to submit a DNA sample”. This sample is then entered into a database which is available to “assist federal, state, and local criminal justice and law enforcement agencies”. SB 104 would grant you the privilege of expungement “if the person
is acquitted of all felony charges, all felony charges are dismissed, or no charges have been filed after 30 days”.

In the meantime, your DNA is available without you being proven guilty. So what could possibly happen? SB 104 also stipulates: “Specifies that the discovery of DNA evidence tending to show previously unknown crimes committed by a person on bail may lead to revocation of bail or an increase in the amount of bail.”

A search under the fourth Amendment and Section 11 is still an invasion of privacy. How can Indiana demand you provide evidence not required as a result of following due process protections of the constitutions for specific crimes? Since Indiana lawmakers are required to pass only those laws for which there is authority in the Indiana Constitution how can they justify eliminating the protections of innocent until proven guilty?

Individual rights as explained in the constitutions are written in plain, ordinary language and protected by their very being against government legislation. A violation of these very protections can never be excused by using such violations to justify the end. Rule of law in a republic is the obligation of all parties. Government should be provided no exemption even if that exemption may have what appears to be an acceptable goal. The individual is the entity to which rights belong. A detailed explanation of the confines placed on lawmakers is available in this article.



Scroll to Top